About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
CSPAN 66
LANGUAGE
English 66
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)
was going to resign from the c.i.a. guest: well, we still don't know too much of the detail about what was going on with the f.b.i. there are a lot of reports out there, and, in fact, it is true that part of this investigation by the f.b.i. had to do with the question of whether somebody was improperly accessing petraeus' personal email accounts. you know, however, the sources that we spoke to said that wasn't really the entirety of the investigation or the thing that really got it rolling. but at some point, for whatever reason, the f.b.i. became concerned that somebody was getting into his account. now, you can see a variety of reasons why they might be worried about that, being the head of the c.i.a.. he's certainly someone that you would not want hackers or foreign intelligence people getting into any of his accounts, personal or professional. the f.b.i. apparently was exploring that, and in the course of going through these emails, found a lot of material that seemed to indicate that he was engaged in some kind of an affair. i think it was not immediately clear because of the lang
how intelligence community is being affected by the resignation of david petraeus as head of the c.i.a. then former senator evan bayh on the fiscal cliff. then senior editor of foreign policy magazine will be on. ♪ host: good morning, welcome to "washington journal." the fbi investigation that led to the resignation of general david petraeus has expanded to general john allen. the impact of all this on the intelligence community and national security will be part of several hearings on capitol hill later this week. lawmakers return to washington today amid a shake-up of the president obama national security team, facing the looming issue of the so-called fiscal cliff. that is where we want to begin today this morning. president obama will meet later on with labor leaders who are insisting that the president not compromise on cuts to medicare and social security. what is your take on this? avoiding this -- avoiding the fiscal cliff? host: remember, you can send us a clear message, post your comments on facebook, or send us an e-mail, journal@c-span.org. courtesy of the newseum, washin
.m. eastern. >> next c.i.a. security director mary rose mccaffrey talks about cyber threats to national security. she's the first female director of security for any u.s. intelligence agency. her remarks are about an hour. >> all right. if we could make our way to our seats, please. all right. welcome back to if eighth annual global security symposium here at the arnott call university in prescott, arizona. i'm an assistant professor anded with the studies. it's my distinct pleasure to introduce an important woman not just because she's a woman but because of her position in the intelligence and security world today, ms. mary rose mccaffrey. she was named the director for the central intelligence agency in 20111. prior to this she was the director for the c.i.a., not the culinary institute of america, of course but the central intelligence agget sit. director of the intelligent unit in the national reconnaissance office. she has had many tours and stops from the d.o.d. of the department of defense, united states navy and the director of national intelligence. she has worked matters rela
this morning. the headline in the "financial times" weekend edition, petraeus resigns from c.i.a. over affair. joining us to talk to us about the story on the phone is the white house reporter for politico. here to talk to us more about the resignation, josh, welcome to the program. so, tell us, how did this whole story break? it came about fairly quickly after some discussion or some rumors started circulating early in the morning yesterday that general petraeus might have been on his way out. guest: yeah, we heard -- the first i heard of it were some somewhat sketchy reports on msnbc yesterday with andrea mitchell saying that petraeus was involved in some, you know, fairly weighty discussions about his future with the white house and that his future status was not entirely clear. at that point, what people thought was that the discussions probably had something to do with the episode in benghazi in september and, you know, the intelligence that flowed or failed to flow from that to the white house in a timely fashion. however, within the period of an hour or so, really while the white house
from former c.i.a. director david petraeus, who is testifying closed door hearings about the attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. he's wrapped up his testimony before the house neat committee and now before the senate intelligence committee. after this morning's testimony, several members came out to speak to reporters, including the chair of the house homeland security committee and intelligence committee member, party king of new york. >> basically it's still not clear how the talking points emerged. it's a long process involving many agencies. including the department of justice, state department, and no one knows yet exactly who came up with the final version of talking points other than to say the original talking points prepared by the c.i.a. were different from the ones that were finally put out. . this was a terrorist attack. i had a different recollection of that. the impression we were given was that the overwhelming amount of evidence was that it rose out of a spontaneous demonstration and was not a terrorist attack. and pointed out the following week when mat
was use talking points, pulled out originally by the cia signed off by the intelligence community, those were requested by the house committee. the intelligence committee sign off of it. the key was there were unclassified talking points at an early stage. i do not think she should be pelerine for this. she did what i would have done or anybody else would have done that was going on a weekend show. you would have said what talking points can i use? you get an unclassified version. i just remember -- i just read it to the committee what i was going to tell you and questions asked. to be sure it did not violate our rules. this particularly is for people in public office because you are used to answering questions candidly to have to be restricted to what is unclassified. is very difficult for your >> did he talk about his resignation? >> [indiscernible] >> i think it is making a very divisive -- we have seen wrong intelligence before. it all surrounded our going into iraq. a lot of people were killed based on bad intelligence. i do not think that is fair game. i think mistakes get made. th
louisiana this morning. as we noted at the top of the segment, former c.i.a. director david patraeus will be testifying behind closed doors today in the senate elect's intelligence committee. for more on that, we want to turn to warren strobal from routers. mr. strobal, thanks for coming on. what are members of congress looking to hear from david petraeus today? >> well, they have a lot of questions. they want to know what the c.i.a. did to try to move its forces to help field the attack and protect the consulate. and even more than that, they want to know what the c.i.a. told the administration about the causes of the attack and why the explanation seemed to shift from an attack that was, grew out of the protest over the anti-muslim film throughout the middle east, to the explanation later that it was a terrorist attack. host: gives an update on the efforts to track down those involved in the attack. >> if you recall shortly after the attack, president obama said he would spare no effort to track down those who were involved in this attack, but so far there have been a handful of su
it to the cia situation. how much of esident obama's interest in having him go somewhere was political to get him out of the way? you know what i am talking about. the their party is part from question in part from concern. you mentioned that he was a great consumer of intelligence. on the other hand, it appears to me, who is a newspaper reader, that there is a militarization of the cia going on. that is the core underneath my question and he was selected in part because of his special operations background and his use of all those kinds of devices in order to move this process within the cia further that has been in the past which should be ofome concern. if you could comment on that i would appreciate it. >> he has not talked to much about the direction the agency is going in. but if y look at open source reporting, since he has come in to the agency and the number of months he has been there, five months he has been there, there have been more drawn strikes than the five months under secretary penev. there have been -- secretary panetta. they have been more effective. some of the strikes h
occurred at the cia last week, my wife immediately gave me a call. [laughter] she said, i hope there is no way the president is going to ask you to take that job again. [laughter] i said no, he's been there, done that. it is an honor to have the chance to share some thoughts with you on so many issues we confront at the defense department, and if i might take this opportunity, since we are close to thanksgiving to wish you and your families and have-- a happy thanksgiving. michelle is a great friend, and i am sorry to see her leave the department of defense, but having been in those kinds of jobs most of my life, i anderson the reason she felt she really -- i understood the reasons she felt she really wanted to spend some time -- i she really wanted to spend timei should tell you i continue to feel her positive impact community. it is not only because of her time as secretary of defense is -- as undersecretary of defense for policy which is an important position, but also because she is a co-founder of the center for new american security, and you cannot walk for long as the pe
of the c.i.a. by his own assessment, he did not meet the standards that he felt were necessary as the director of the c.i.a. with respect to this personal matter he's now dealing with with his family and with his wife. it's on that basis that he tendered his resignation and it's on that basis that i accepted it. but i want to emphasize that from my perspective at least, he has provided this country an extraordinary service. we are safer because of the work that dave petraeus has done and my main hope right now is that he and his family are able to move on and that this ends up being a single side note on what has otherwise been an extraordinary career. >> what about voters? do they deserve to know? >> again, i think you'll have to talk to the f.b.i. in terms of what their protocols are when it comes to what started off as a potential criminal investigation. one of the challenges here is, is that we're not supposed to meddle in criminal investigations. that's been our practice. and i think that there are certain procedures that the f.b.i. follow or d.o.j. follow when they're inv
into the libya. -- the attacks in libya. acting cia director and the intelligence directorate among witnesses. next we hear from house select intelligence committee ranking member, diane feinstein and the vice chairman. this is 20 minutes. accent? i think what is important about the hearing is the fact that members of the intelligence committee were able to get a lot of facts. i think what really occurred as far as benghazi was concerned, we went through a timeline. we went through representatives, the cia, and the fbi, and i think when members were able to see the time line, the sense was still the same. you have a group of extremists who took it vantage of the situation, and we lost four american lives. there were representatives from al qaeda and other groups. you had individuals with the ability to shoot mortars, and i think it shows it was a terrorist attack of sophistication. whether these people gain expertise from being in benghazi or being out there and fighting from that process, that is one thing. we are still focusing on the people who did it. we need to bring them to justice and
for the start of a lame duck session. meanwhile, fallout continues over the resignation of the cia director, david petraeus, that is where we want to begin with you this morning. we want to hear your thoughts on the abrupt departure of america's top spy and when congress should have been informed of the probe on the cia director. give us a call -- host: you can also catch up with us on all of your favorite social media sites, twitter, facebook, an e-mail. a very good morning to you. we want to take you right to the story that is leading the major papers this morning, the resignation and fallout over the cia director, david petraeus. the timeline shows that the fbi discovered the affair in summer. high-level officials and the justice department were notified in late summer that fbi agents had uncovered what appeared to be an extramarital affair involving the director of the agency. law enforcement officials did not notify anyone outside the fbi or justice department until last week because the investigation was incomplete and there were initial concerns about possible security breaches. host
for the well-planned ambush and assault. a request for military help was made and denismed c.i.a. operatives were twice told to stand down enstead of helping the ambassador. why were the ambassador's calls for help, why did they go unanswered? the american people need to know this. what happened. why didn't the u.s. help the ambassador when he was urn attack? and why what individuals killed the ambassador? and what has the united states done to track these outlaws down, hold them accountable for this, yet another attack on 9/11. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seebling recognition? >> to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to recognize a tremendous milestone in the tenth district of illinois in the chicago area. recently, the solomon scheckter day school of metropolitan chicago celebrated its 50th anniversary. founded in 1962 with only 15 students in its first class, it's grown to pr
by america's cable companies in 1979 brought to you as a public service by your television provider. >> c.i.a. director david petraeus resigned friday after an f.b.i. investigation uncovered an extramarital affair with his biographer. they talked about their book last february. this is an hour. >> i'd like to say a word about an important event coming thup april. it's world book night and it's an ambitious attempt to hand out 1 million free books around the united states. you can read about how this amazing effort is being organized and sign up to get involved yours at u.s. dot world book night.org. i mention this because the deed line is sign up is tonight. so there is still time after this event. now a word about our guest this evening paula broad we will and their new book all in t education of general petraeus. petraeus has become the most prominent military general since world war twofment and while he's already been a subject of several books, paula was given unusual access to him and has brought his story up to date. as paula writes early in the book one of petraeus' most important men
with the process under way. >> to take a step back, it's been only a week since it came out, we have seen the c.i.a. director resign under pressure in the disgrace of the scandal. we have not seen the -- we have seen the leader of afghanistan implicated in this. what's the president's reaction to this? is he disgusted? embarrassed? what should we know here? >> well, the president was certainly surprised when he was informed about the situation regarding general petraeus on thursday. he greatly appreciates general petraeus' remarkable service to his country, both in uniform and at the c.i.a. and as he said in his statement , his heart -- his thoughts and prayers go out to both general petraeus and holy -- holly petraeus at this time. he's focused on his policy agenda. and he has confidence in the acting director at the c.i.a. and he has confidence in the military to carry out the various missions that he has asked them to carry out. on specific individuals and matters pertaining to the recent revelations, i would refer you to the pentagon and the i.g. on the one hand and to the f.b.i. with regards t
overseas -- the cia also has the responsibility for targeting individuals overseas. some say to let the department of defense run any military operations when using drones for strikes. host: "the new york times" says with 2500 people killed by the cia and military since mr. obama took office, the administration is still pushing to make the rules formal and resolve a disagreement about when legal action is justified. mr. obama and his advisers are still debating whether remote- controlled killing should be a measure of last resort. who comes down on what side of the issue? who do we see arguing one way or the other? guest: both sides have a stake in this. politicians love this weapon system. it is easy to use politically. we do not see the bad results often right away. we see the good results. we see a terrorist attack or information -- information attacked. the concern is the low back. if we're attacking civilians in pakistan, it is creating a generation of people who hate the united states going forward. fundamentally, we are so far ahead with this technology in the world that this
a story. when events occurred at the cia last week, my wife immediately gave me a call. [laughter] she said, i hope there is no way the president is going to ask you to take that job again. i said no, he's been there, done that. it is an honor to have the chance to share some thoughts with you on so many issues we confront at the defense department, and if i might take this opportunity, since we are close to thanksgiving to wish you and your families and have the thanksgiving. -- a happy thanksgiving. michelle is a great friend, and i am sorry to see her leave the department of defense, but having been in those kinds of jobs most of my life, i anderson the reason she felt she really wanted to spend some time -- i understand the reason she felt she really wanted to spend time with her family. i should tell you i continue to feel her positive impact throughout the national security community. it is not only because of her time as secretary of defense is an important position, but also because she is a co-founder of the center for new american security, and you cannot walk for long as the
today having met with the acting director of the cia and ambassador rice, because it is certainly clear from the beginning that we knew that those with ties to all khyber were involved in the attack on the embassy and clearly the impression that was given of the information given to the american people is wrong. -- we knew that those with ties to al qaeda were involved. they knew by the 22nd that the information given to them was wrong, yet they have not cleared that up with the american people to date in saying they were wrong, including the president of the united states. host: the new hampshire senator went on to say she will block any clinton's successor, because she wants more information about the benghazi attacks. what is next on that front? since an individual senator can put a hold on a nomination. that could prevent this from going forward. we have seen this in previous cases. if we saw this in the bush and administration would john bolton. we have seen it in a couple of cases in the obama administration where nominee for a high government post was held up for a long time. it
requests that had been made for months? and could you not see this coming? and the c.i.a. needs to be asked a lot o questions also. a select committee, where you have members of intel, foreign relations and armed services, listening to all three agencies explain themselves i think is essential to get to the truth. i will not know what general petraeus says in t intel committee, and i won't get to ask him questions. there will be people in the intel committee that will not be able to ask secretary panetta, general ha*pl and others about the -- general hamm and others about the d.o.d. piece. the best thing for the senate to do, i think, is to have a bipartisan select committee where you combine the resources of all three of the committees who have jurisdiction over different pieces and create a professional approach to solving the problem. it will be run by our democratic colleagues because they're in charge of the body. it should be. there have been times in the past, iran-contra and other examples of where committee combine their resources to make sure that they full lip understand what was
. over the resignation of the cia director, david petraeus, that is where we want to begin with you this morning. we want to hear your thoughts on the abrupt departure of america's top spy and when congress should have been informed of the probe on the cia director. law enforcement officials did not notify anyone outside the fbi or justice department until last week because the investigation was incomplete and there were initial concerns about possible security breaches. host: another story from "the washington post" this morning. the headline, "probe of the petraeus investigation." we want to take you to one of those lawmakers now, congressman peter king, he was on "state of the union" this week, expressing concerns over when the fbi, the white house, and members of congress knew about the investigation. [video clip] >> i have questions about the whole matter. how to the fbi have been investigating it for this long? and if the general was involved, to me, if it was, the fbi director had the obligation to tell the head of the council at the earliest date. seems to have been going on
the american dead and survivors led behind a charged compound and the bullets guard cia building in benghazi. how confident are you in the white house team? president obama defended yesterday amid criticism he received for poor performance given the issue. let's take a listen to some of the criticism that has been employed. this is on the senate floor yesterday. john mccain called for the select committee to investigate the attacks. [video clip] >> why is it that anybody including our ambassadors to the united nations would believe spontaneous demonstrations are composed of people with mortars, rocket-propelled grenades, and heavy weapons? nobody believes that. why did president obama insists that he labeled the defense an act of terrorism on september 12 when we know now -- i repeat, we know now in an interview on the same day he refused to characterize the attacks in this way and spent two weeks putting the emphasis on a spontaneous protest to a hateful video including in his address to the united nations on september 25? we need a select committee. americans deserve to know. the families
and the deputy director of the cia. [inaudible] she said if it was a spontaneous demonstration. it was not. there was telling evidence at that time. >> [inaudible] i am very disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways. i think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a mob that turned into a riot was far-filled. at the end of the day, we are going to get to the bottom of this. we have to have a system that we trust. if you don't know what happened, just say you don't know what happened. you can say "i do not want to give that information." you can say the american people got bad information from president obama in the days after. the question is should they have been given the information at all? if you can do nothing but give that information, it is better to give no information at all. not only is the information bad, and i am more convinced than ever that it was, but it was unjustified to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obama three weeks before an election. >> [inaudible] >>
it was made to inform president obama of the investigation of the c.i.a. director. >> with regard to that issue what we did was duct investigation in the way we normally conduct a criminal investigation. we do so in a way that so they can be seen as being done in an impartial way which we follow the facts. we do not share outside the justice department, outside the f.b.i. the facts of ongoing investigations. we made the determination as we were going through the matter that there was not a threat to national security. had we made the determination that a threat to national security existed, we would, of course, had made that known to the president and also to the appropriate members on the hill. but as we went through the investigation, looked at the facts and tried to examine them as they developed, we were very -- we felt e very secure in the knowledge that a national security threat did not exist that warranted the sharing of that information with the white house or the hill. but when we got to a point in the investigation and it was very late in the investigation after a very
and the united nations ambassador susan rice joined by acting cri cray -- c.i.a. director on the hill today to meet with a number of member of congress. following the meeting, senator lindsay graham and john mccain spoke to others. their comments to reporters are about 10 minutes. >> we had a very candid discussion with ms. rice and the acting director c.i.a., we are troubled by some of the answers we have gotten. there was evidence leading up to the attack on the consulate and the tragic deaths of brave americans and ambassador rice was warned sufficiently. it is clear that the information given to the american people was incorrect when she said it was a spontaneous demonstration that triggered it. it was not. there were many indications that that was not the case, including statements from libyans and other americans. bottom line i'm more concerned than i was before that the explanation about how four americans tide does not do justice to the reality at the time and in hindsight clearly was wrong. in realtime it was disconnected from reality. anybody looking at the threats, it would jump
involvement. indications of extremists. to indicate even though it was clearly evidence of the c.i.a. there was al qaeda involvement. >> did you get any idea why it was changed? >> this said it goes through a long process. >> did he seem concerned things have been changed? >> they did not realize the full significance of that. for an unclassified statement, this was acceptable. it is still very vague. they he relay any of your concerns? are you satisfied with what he said today? >> i am satisfied with the ultimate conclusion he reached. i disagreed with his recollection of what he told us on september 14. >> what would you say about the affair? >> no comment at all. >> did it make it hard to get to the brass tacks? >> it was made clear from the start that would not be a focus of the questioning. that was off to the side. >> any reason you wanted to hear from him was because he went to libya, so he was -- is there anything you can tell us he learned from being on the ground? what's that is classified other than the fact they now clearly believed it did not arise out of a demonstration
this briefing, news also broke that cia director david petraeus had resigned due to an extramarital affair. surely after this, president obama released a statement accepting his resignation. this briefing is just under one hour. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. welcome back to the white house briefing room. it is a pleasure to be back. we have not done this too often of late since we have all been traveling. i want to thank all of you who traveled with us over these past several weeks and months. i know that sometimes grueling. it was certainly part of a remarkable process. just a reminder of the greatness of the country in which we live. before i take your questions, let me give you this announcement. next thursday, the president will travel to new york to the recovery efforts, meet with affected families and local officials, and the brave first responders that have worked tirelessly to protect communities following hurricane sandy. more details about the trip will be announced when they are available. the new york area. earlier today, the president convened a call with homeland s
.d in the riraq the real cia scandal of my line is we endorsed torture as a national policy, yet no one will ever be brought to account for that as far as we could see. the fbi should be investigating torture rather than american love affairs. this is something that really struck me. we have had to once of controversy about libya and what happened there. what happened there was bad. it was bad. four americans were killed. hundreds of security contractors were killed in iraq. i have written two books on iraq and i have never been able to figure out an exact number. the answer is no one cares and no one seems to kill stair. -- still. the official tally leaves out at least 57 incidents that we know about. the tally is quite suspect. this puts aside the foreign security contractors, south africans, costa ricans. there seems to be no tally of this at all and nobody cares. i have got to wonder how much of the mess in benghazi is simply fueled by fox news, poisoning the american bloodstream. it really bothers me. i compare that to the total carelessness about the deaths of security contractors in iraq.
anymore. that is also happening in the intelligence-gathering field at the cia where, quite literally -- >> i do not want to go too far. i want to talk to a little bit about the role of cable television, for which you touched on before. in a recent interview with bill o'reilly of a fox, you said making it difficult if not impossible for congress to reach across the aisle and find compromise. you also wrote, not good for the republic. what you mean. >> this goes back. it is a continuation of the same thing. in addition to demonstrating that network news divisions can make money, there was a technological explosion. it wasn't just the three networks anymore. you have cable, satellite television, and the internet. now there are hundreds, even thousands of competitors out there. what is incredibly cheap to put on the air is a couple of people like you and me just yelling at each other. at talking. what draws an audience is when, in fact, we disagree. when, in fact, we get nasty with one another. what rupert murdoch's demonstrated is that there really was a hunger in america for something
. among those testifying today is the acting director of central intelligence, c.i.a. national intelligence director, and others. both the house and senate holding closed door hearings. we have cameras outside the hearing rooms in case any of the witnesses or members of the committee come to speak to the media. elsewhere, oklahoma republican tom coburn will be briefing reporters about proposed pentagon budget cuts. we'll have that live for you when it starts. it's scheduled to begin at 11:00 eastern. about 10 minutes from now we expect to take you there live. in the meantime, a look at items in the news and comments from c-span viewers from this morning's "washington journal." host: question for you this morning how confident department are you in the white house national security team? our first caller is stan in new york on our democrats line. hi. chris: thank you for taking my call. i real will i appreciate all the things that c-span does. there's not enough people bringing issues like this to light. i'm the father of two young marines. so naturally things like this really g
in the libyan sea. new information released from the cia. the cia rushed security operatives through american diplomatic compound in libya within 25 minutes of its coming under attack and play a more central role in the effort to send off tonight long siege that has been demolished publicly united states intelligence officials said this on thursday. you can read that story in a the "washington post." that benghazi attack playing as one of the main foreign policy issues in this 2012 election. that is it for the first segment of the "washington journal." in the second segment, we will look at ohio. and later we will be joined by ohio republican party chairman, bob bennett. ♪ >> first and foremost, we have to create an environment that our small businesses can try. one of the uniqueness on the border that is different from the tax reform needed for the whole nation, we need comprehensive immigration reform. as a trouble the border and i meet with the ranchers, we have a workforce problem because our and for -- our immigration system is broken. we cannot get workers to go back and forth. these
have a standing army of armed bureaucrats and the t.s.a., c.i.a., f.b.i., fish and wildlife, corps of engineers, etc.,p citizens are protch guilty until proven innocent in the constitutional administrative corgets. government in a free society should have no authority to meddle into social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. all things peaceful, even when controversial should be permitted. we must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just as we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. but even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech, a very dangerous trend. since 9/11, monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required. the proliferation of federal crimes. the constitution established four federal crimes. today the experts can't even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books. they number into the thousands. no one person request comprehend the enormity
-up. >> this weekend on c-span3, 49 years later, the questions remain. lone gunman, the mob, the cia, castro. what happened in dallas? the assassination of john f. kennedy, 7:30 p.m. eastern and pacific. >> it was in 1982 that judge harold greene issued a decision which led to the breakup of the at&t corp.. that is our topic this week on the "communicators," the impact of that decision 30 years later on the telecommunications. joining us is professor roger noll of stanford, as well as professor jerry hausman of mit, both of whom were involved at various levels in the breakup or the decision to break up at&t. joining us in the washington studio is paul. professor noll, first of all, what with your activity during the breakup of at&t and what led to that decision? >> the antitrust case was formed during the johnson administration the late 1960's and a presidential task force called the telecommunications policy task force. it concluded the telecommunications industry, the part in federal jurisdiction, should be competitive and made recommendations both -- mainly to the fcc about how to cause that to
of asymmetrical threats. before that he created his signal legend where he took roughly 110 cia officers special operation forces to overthrow the taliban. mission accomplished. we would like to start there. how did you get that mission? how did you come up? >> thank you for the opportunity to be here. it is an intelligent mission. we deploy the first teams into afghanistan in september of 1999. for two years we develop networks prospective allies. we had two years of hard work building this network and building these alliances. we knew who we could depend upon. we knew who we could go to. it was not just this by mapping the human terrain. >> along that path that there had been the hunt for osama bin laden and the first idea for drones. tell us a little bit about that. anticipate product of this. they were reporting on his whereabouts. we were passing this on to the policy makers. we cannot get the authorities are resources to go and and go against been logged in. we need a greater verification. we looked at bowlines, not long grain objects. we were driven by our human sources. we found osama bi
any announcementes to make on personnel matters. i would address that question to the c.i.a. and d.n.i. >> is he coming to the white house? >> i don't know. >> senator proposed one solution to the fiscal cliff challenge is closing the loopholes as they apply to the highest income earners without changing rates? would this meet the president's test? >> the president has made clear that the only acceptable approach to dealing with our fiscal challenges and the only approach that allows us to continue to invest in areas of our economy is to take a balanced approach, to make sure that in addition to the trillion dollars of spending cuts, in addition to doing more on the spending side, in addition to doing more to reform our entitlement programs, we have to include revenue. the president made clear every day asking the wellingiest to pay a little bit more. the npt his own specific proposals has put forward measure that is include reforms to our tax code like the buffet rule and limiting deductions for higher earners. so that would be part of the conversation. but when i comes to the bus
-called fiscal cliff. during this briefing, news broke that cia director david petraeus had resigned due to an extramarital affair. shortly after this, president obama release is statement except in his presentation. this briefing is just under an hour -- accepting his resignation. this briefing is just under an hour. >> good afternoon. ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to the white house briefing room. it's a pleasure to be back. we haven't done this too often of late since we've all been traveling. i want to thank all of you who traveled with us over the past weeks and months. i know it was sometimes grueling. i'm sure fascinating and certainly part of what is a remarkable process. it's just a reminder of the greatness of the country in which we live. before i take your questions, let me give you this announcement. next thursday the president will travel to new york to view recovery efforts and meet with families and officials and thank first responders who have worked tire leslie following hurricane sandy. -- tirelessly following hurricane sandy. more details about the trip will be a
" this morning. the lead story stemming from the former cia director david petra eus. in barber from oklahoma city, oklahoma. you are on the independent line. we're talking about congressional leadership and ability to make something happen as far as the fiscal cliff is concerned. caller: good morning. my thing is the elephant in the room, grover norquist. as soon as they agreed to raise taxes they probably will not get their jobs back because he has a 58% of going after these guys. even on c-span he is bragging about taking the president down for breaking the pledge and some others. you have paul ryan who is an devotee. that is a novel, not something to build the republican platform on. i think that will be the biggest problem. republicans do not want to lose their jobs. host: nancy pelosi announcing she will return as the house minority leader, one of the ones at the white house just today that you probably saw. also talking with reporters after the meeting. here she talks about her focus that she had going into the meeting. [video clip] >> the speaker spoke about a framework going into nex
events occurred at the cia last week, my wife immediately gave me a call. [laughter] and she said i hope that there is no way the president is going to ask you to take that job again. i said i have been there, done that. michele, it babies and gentlemen, it is an honor to share some thoughts with you on some of the issues that we confront at the defense department. and also, if i might just take the opportunity since we're close to thanksgiving to wish all of you and your families and happy thanksgiving. michelle is a dear friend and a great, strategic thinker and a great public servant. obviously sorry to leave her see the -- leave the department of defense, but having been in those kinds of jobs most of my life, i understood the reasons why she felt she really wanted to spend some time with her family, and she deserved that. but i should tell you i continue to feel her positive impact throughout the national security community. she is always there. it is not only because of her time as undersecretary of defense for policy, should it is an extremely important position at the department
that killed four americans. >> a very candid discussion with the director of the cia. we are significantly troubled by many the answers we got. the evidence was overwhelming leading up to the attack on our consulates. whether ambassador rice was informed sufficiently is a correct depiction of the events that took place. but the intervention was incorrect when she said it was a spontaneous demonstration. it was not, and there was compelling evidence that the time that that was not the case, including statements by libyans as well as other americans. mortars and rocket-propelled grenades were not spontaneous demonstrations. >> i think it does not do justice to the reality at the time and in hindsight, -- in real time [indiscernible] anybody looking at the threat in libya, it would jump out at you. i am disappointed in our intelligence community. with a little bit of inquiring and curiosity, and think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode as related to a video that created a disturbance that turned into a riot, at the end of the day, we are going to get to the bottom of this.
months to find out that the cia director was involved? i have real questions about this. the time line has to be analyzed to see what happened. >> it looks like general petraeus will not be testifying this week at the hearings that we talked about on the september 11 incident in benghazi. here is the headline -- "lawmakers have questions." host: we are getting your fallout this morning from all the papers. this from christine -- host: like i said, we are getting your thoughts this morning. we will go now to ryan, from houston, texas. good morning. caller: good morning, i am really disappointed in general petraeus. the discipline of mines are being taken in by people writing books, which is a travesty for america. too many people in america are involved in infidelity. we tell young people about discipline and the way to do things right, so i think it is a shame. i have a brother who is an airborne rancher and he is not in the army no more. he is still disciplined. this is a travesty, man. host: thank you for the call. this from twitter this morning -- host: here is a timeline of the eve
president obama of the investigation of the c.i.a.? >> i would say that with regard to that issue, what we did was conduct the investigation in the way that we normally conduct criminal investigations. we do so in a way that -- so they can be seen as being done in an impartial way. we follow the facts. we do not share outside the justice department, outside the f.b.i., the facts of ongoing investigations. we made the determines as we were going through the matter that there was not a threat to national security. had we made the determination that a threat to national security existed we would, of course, have made that known to the president and also to appropriate members on the hill. but as we went through the investigation, looked at the facts and tried to examine them as they developed, we felt very secure in the knowledge that a national security threat did not exist that warranted the sharing of that information with the white house or with the hill. but when we got to a point in the investigation, it was very late in the investigation after a very critical interview occurred on the
travels overseas to analyze these things over time. and it looks like the cia was more responsible for the libya stuff. the ambassador chose to go to benghazi. he left the embassy. is partially the state department's fault. it is dangerous for americans to do stuff overseas in places like that. the conservative talk shows have gone overboard in their commentary about libya. it is really nobody's fault. host: "new york times as a piece looking at petraeus. if you wanted to read it later today. on thursday with him away in the middle east, intelligence officials give their own account of the chaotic night when two is pretty officers died with the american ambassador. and another diplomat. the officials acknowledge that the security officer work on contract with the cia. a little bit from that story on the front page of the new york times. house and senate elections and how you are going to vote. this is perryville, indiana, steve. caller: i am voting straight democrat. there is no way that the republicans are going to help anybody. they are wanting us to let the rich have a more mone
of the cia would resign this week and the worst hurricane or storm to hit new york for 100 years hit two weeks before. i am really proud of the election coverage, which was on the tail end of the storm coverage. and i was proud of the storm coverage. you have hundreds of people reject as a one of the great things for e students to look forward to. when you are with a terrific news organization. i love what i saw here in terms of the broadcast being put on and everybody putting on what as one of the greatest facilities i have seen. the spirit -- you will see it and the local newspaper -- how important it is we are still public servants. i think so much of what happens in a news today, people forget that. they forget -- you are here as a public service. that is an important part of what we do. the idea that everybody of the hundreds of people that work at cbs news during the crazy week of hurricane sandy has an example -- each has their own story of difficulty at home. all of them came right to work and ran into the story. that is what happens time and time again in the news business. you
in the intelligence-gathering field at the cia where, quite literally -- >> i do not want to go too far. i want to talk to a little bit about the role of cable television, for which you touched on before. in a recent interview with bill o'reilly of a fox, you said making it difficult if not impossible for congress to reach across the aisle and find compromise. you also wrote, not good for the republic. what you mean. >> this goes back. it is a continuation of the same thing. in addition to demonstrating that network news divisions can make money, there was a technological explosion. it wasn't just the three networks anymore. you have cable, satellite television, and the internet. now there are hundreds, even thousands of competitors out there. what is incredibly cheap to put on the air is a couple of people like you and me just yelling at each other. at talking. what draws an audience is when, in fact, we disagree. when, in fact, we get nasty with one another. what rupert murdoch's demonstrated is that there really was a hunger in america for something that was less liberal than what the networ
would add this -- we need to enhance our cia. the intel i get in classified briefings is terrible. it is a shame. i cannot talk about what it is, but i will tell you why did political responses that are from the public sources and briefings that are supposed to be top secret. we have gone down a long way in our intel. that has to change, because that let us be more mobile. >> is there a circumstance in which you would see that you could vote for a resolution to enter a war in iran? >> could you repeat the question? >> is there a circumstance in which you could vote for a war on iran? >> we have to do everything we need to do to make sure that iran does not a nuclear weapon. israel is our best friend. we need to protect israel. yes, obviously i could if it were in the strategic best interest of the country and the strategic best interest of israel, which is often the strategic best interest of the country. we need to keep iran from a nuclear weapon, but we need to do everything -- sanctions seem to be working now. when the best things is that we have involved other nations in basic
of interests when the f.b.i. is investigating information that involves the director of the c.i.a., when you have an attorney general that has information that needs to go immediately to the commander-in-chief, to the president of the country, we need to find out, did it go there, and if not, why not. and if so, and what is the president doing with this information because now he's saying he didn't get it until after the election. why so long? what are the problems here? why are the stories different? why are the stores told different from the evidence those people had in hair thands when -- hands when they told those stories the answers need to be found and there's clearly a conflict of interest. we do not need to return to the days of an f.b.i. director who investigates not to report to the commander in chief but to gather information so that he can get it and use it or provide toyota someone else who can use it to force people do what they want. so what happens when f.b.i. director who comes into office honorably with the best of intentions as it appears j. edgar hoover did, to battle org
on the basis of drone attacks, cia operatives, special operations forces out in the field, and all of that back by civilian employees, civilian contractors, and we know next to nothing about what is being done by any of these groups. >> because the reporting is not being done? >> well, i mean, look. it's because we have found that keeping -- that, a, the american public won't stand for a draft. that, b, the professional military was not enough to fight all over the world as we are now fighting. we have been focused on iraq, we have been focused on afghanistan. we actually believe that all the troops are coming back from afghanistan. i will tell you here and now that is not going to happen. we will still have u.s. troops in afghanistan one year from now and two years from now, five years from now. where's the press. >> where is it? >> obviously, these are not issues that the people who run our news programs today -- >> why not? >> because they don't draw an audience. what draws an audience is charlie sheen. what draws an audience is people yelling at each other. it is not enough to say these iss
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)